I can only speak for myself, but I have no issue waiting for over 2 minutes to get into a tier 1 game in the middle of the night when battles at high tiers seem horrid and I want to relax. I can only recommend the Medium I with the top gun and full HE loadout to relieve stress - if you win, lose, carry or fail just does not matter at tier 1

Limiting queue times is generally a very solid argument. While perhaps unsuitable as an official stance, I assume Wargaming knows darn well how much waiting time most players can tolerate - almost eight years since release.

Zoggo_, on 08 February 2019 - 02:53 PM, said:

Definition of mistake - an act that is misguided or wrong. Exactly what the 9.18 MM is. It may well have cured a few issues with the previous MM but it created a whole lot more problems. I'm guessing if WG ran a poll on which MM players prefered 95% of us would say pre 9.18.

We also know from the CC meeting at Tankfest that there was meant to be an algorithm in 3/5/7 mm to stop players from being constantly bottom tier. This wasn't added so I would say that was a massive mistake.

I would have more respect for WG if they actually came out and admitted they made a mistake rather than try and gloss over it with corporate PR nonsense.

I like to differentiate a bit between 9.18-style MM and post-9.19-style MM - where the matchmaker was tweaked for more three-tier games and Wargaming added rules to equalize the teams (to very questionable effect). That being said, merely a few months following 9.19, the forum was definitely split on their opinion of 3-5-7. I do believe most disliked it, but the forum demography is not representative of the game.

From a player's point of view, the 3-5-7 scheme certainly looks like a mistake. For Wargaming, well, if they had a specific purpose in mind, it might not be deemed as such. There are some tidbits around that suggest that there was a clear idea behind it. My assumption is that this particular idea was not hatched by someone playing the game, but rather out of application of common psychology. I'm not an expert on the matter, but I believe the subjective perception of a session with one standout game would be better than a session with good averages. Think in terms of a slot machine.

Some speculation could be that the original intention is to have a nominal 20% chance of a top-tier game. Every fifth game is top-tier. Six-seven games would likely not be an uncommon session length for what likely is WoT's main (intended) audience, equal to about an hour. Alternatively that is why they kept it for so long before, apparently, backtracking a bit - there may well have been statistics available which, if interpreted with certain goals in mind, would suggest a success.

Exactly why they are changing now might be hard to tell, but perhaps there were long-term trends that warranted it.

As for avoiding constant bottom-tier matches, given the article's claims, that would lead to either long queue times or a lot of single-tier games. That might not be something Wargaming wants or the players would be satisfied with over time. There are plenty of variables in WoT that obscures certain issues with the game, namely balancing. That's one reason why it may not necessarily be a great thing at all.

Last but not least, Wargaming has to "keep face". In the past, they've chosen to do that by just ignoring anything and everything they want. If they supply information, there are likely guidelines for how to do it. You want to appear to be in control of the situation - especially when you likely have a demanding playerbase.

you, with your logical and reasonable solution, you are not welcome here!

one would also think that the surplus on any tier would invite WG to create a Frontline or Grand Battle mode for the affected tier. wouldn't mind a 30v30 on tier V, VI, VII or IX. but WG still has to learn that players who don't spam their premium rounds and don't hold a premium account all the time still create more revenue than those who stop playing completely.

IN SOVIET RASHA, SUPPLY DEMANDS YOU!

Well said

Too many red apples? Hier, take some more greens: there will be some green in your red apple's basket now - no more all red apples: see, problem solved.

Yes, we realise that having the matchmaker get us into battle quickly or at all is the ideal situation. But how about you do something like. 30 seconds to try and get into an all same tier battle, then 30 more seconds to do a 1 tier dispersion and failing that then up to 2 tiers dispersion. That would make such a massive difference that people would actually wat to play!

To be clear, after these two Years I do not care about the reasons which are given to us nor that someone would say us "we made a mistake and we are sorry", if templates will be corrected (or banned) at last.

p. s.

The last two Years brought some illness to me...

Every single time nowadays I try to use some different class than LT in a battle I see all the mistakes of mine teammates with LT's who do not have time to look at map....

p. p. s.

sorry for off-topic....

Snipers, who do use only sniper scope and do not look at map, don't ask Your oneshot teammate with LT to go to die for Your one single shot... You may miss and then may lose because of this Your wish....

its not about teams what tanks what tier its all about xvm 1 team are bad players 1 team all green blue and purple players that is the problem . . pen you can all but to play against a real goor team its better to drawn your self . . i think you wot know that verry well . . . .

Hi there. I play the game for almost 4 years now. I really like this game. But something is bothering me and my friends. Okay the matchmaking is important. But also important (if not more) is with what (skill level or % rate) players do you play with. Example: me and my friends often play in platoon. But in 2 - 3 hours of playing we achieve i think max 5 wins and thats crazy. 2 minutes after the battle starts we are loosing with 0 to 8. And on the end of battles we lose whatever we do with scores like 3 to 15 or maybe max 6 to 15. This is not enjoyable really and it makes you mad. We are not pros or something like that, but common, you cant play like this and have fun. Playing in platoon is not worth the time and nerves from my side and my friends side. Anyone with same experience?

after the Match Making engine chose the list of the two teams, it evaluates each team players statistics and adjust the teams accordingly.

so we don't see battles which ends 15/0 ,15/1 ~15/4.

Each team will have skilled players and the none skilled ones.

BR,

Exactly.They don t understand that i don t care if the battle start fast because it ends in 4 minutes, That is no battle is just slaughter and it does not matter witch side you are.
They are so obsessed about this template but i always get bottom list with my heavy and a top tier light can kill me instant.
They rely need to focus on this skilled second phase of MM.
There is no competition in slaughter.

I'm actually not in favour of skill based match making. Epic carry of games would rarely happen since the teams would never be unbalanced.

Just make +2/-2 happen less often.

There's a difference between skill based MM, and what some of the people have proposed here. Personally I am very much against skill based MM, but the other proposal I've seen in this thread could work as follows. The matchmaker selects the 30 tanks for the battle, and already knows which two equivalent tanks are on each team. All it needs to do then is look up the players' ratings. The better player in the first pair gets assigned to team A. The better player in the second pair gets assigned to team B, etc. There's still flaws with that proposal, as you can actually still get unlucky and get all the purple players on one team, but on average it would happen far less often. Also, it'd need to be able to adapt to account for platoons. Overall, I'd be quite pleased with a system that puts SOME skill factoring into the MM.

On the other hand, WG have been thinking about all this for some time, and I'm sure they've looked into it already, so maybe there's an additional issue we can't see.

Go to the first and the third mine links and read carefuly if You want to understand why increasing of amount of -1/+1 with current templates is not a cure for MM.

I realise that going from +2/-2 to +1/-1 doesn't in itself resolve the issue of being bottom tier. But I would be fine with that. I would happily be -1 every single match than the mix of mostly -2, sometimes -1 and super rare top tier that we have now. Also I find I don't always enjoy the times when I am top tier in a 3 tier game as where is the satisfaction in beating down on a load of much less powerful tanks?.

I know lots of players like the 3 tier games though so I guess we should keep it in the game but just makes those games rare instead of the norm.

WoT_RU_Doing, on 09 February 2019 - 03:18 PM, said:

There's a difference between skill based MM, and what some of the people have proposed here. Personally I am very much against skill based MM, but the other proposal I've seen in this thread could work as follows. The matchmaker selects the 30 tanks for the battle, and already knows which two equivalent tanks are on each team. All it needs to do then is look up the players' ratings. The better player in the first pair gets assigned to team A. The better player in the second pair gets assigned to team B, etc. There's still flaws with that proposal, as you can actually still get unlucky and get all the purple players on one team, but on average it would happen far less often. Also, it'd need to be able to adapt to account for platoons. Overall, I'd be quite pleased with a system that puts SOME skill factoring into the MM.

On the other hand, WG have been thinking about all this for some time, and I'm sure they've looked into it already, so maybe there's an additional issue we can't see.

This suggestion definitelty has advantages. I suppose I would need to see what effect it made before knowing if I prefered it or not.

Go to the first and the third mine links and read carefuly if You want to understand why increasing of amount of -1/+1 with current templates is not a cure for MM.

I know and understand what your saying

however

Wargame understands something that's becoming more important and relevant now than very highly experienced and skilled players don't understand the new and inexperienced to this game & the casual & not great players

which makes up well over 50% maybe 60% of WOT who DONT enjoy at all! being farmed with +2MM while always bottom Tier AND the Enemy team is mostly Green / blue players while your team are Reds / Yellows this occurs

far to frequently mostly as the Match Maker is a quick/ grab into battle in 15 seconds or so …. that IS NOT a good Match Maker in any game

The above is why so many players leave the game WOT after sometimes only a single year of playing in there eyes a non-fun and dissatisfied frustrating gameplay WHILE Unicums and the like don't care less its all about WN8 farming so

Winning is NOT that important anymore ~ but to 75% of players just WINNING gets you above 50% WR and away from the hated XVM Tomato Red player stigma

player numbers are dwindling year on year WG cannot ignore that anymore

(not if it like the 1000 x $$$$ its got used to earning from its Premium shop ~THAT takes big active player numbers remaining & growing upwards (not down) on our EU servers ….